Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

The vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study has been done roughly a dozen times. But none of those studies are like this one. We had someone who disagreed with us do the work and come to the same conclusion. Science gets stronger that way. That's what the scientific method actually demands...... show more

Del Bigtree

387,976 subscribers

88,020 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Здоровье и велнес Новости и политика Наука и технологии

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

RFK Jr. just broke down to a college student that the claim “vaccines don’t cause autism” has never been proven. “The people who told you that have been lying to you.“ “In fact, only one vaccine has ever been studied, the MMR vaccine.” “The 20 doses of the seven vaccines that are given during the first year of life — the DTP, the Hib, the hepatitis B, the pneumococcal vaccines and the polio vaccines — have never been studied.” “Congress passed the 1986 Vaccine Act and said, you’ve got to study the DTP vaccine… That study has never been done.” “The only studies that were done were MMR studies, and they were all epidemiological studies… you can’t prove causation with an epidemiological study.” “In 2017, the Institute of Medicine looked at all of the MMR studies and they threw out all but four of them… and the four that were left were all epidemiological studies.” “None of them did what you would want to do if you actually wanted the answer, which is to compare health outcomes in a vaccinated group against health outcomes in an unvaccinated group.” “That’s what we need to do and those studies we’re doing now.”

RFK Jr. just broke down to a college student that the claim “vaccines don’t cause autism” has never been proven. “The people who told you that have been lying to you.“ “In fact, only one vaccine has ever been studied, the MMR vaccine.” “The 20 doses of the seven vaccines that are given during the first year of life — the DTP, the Hib, the hepatitis B, the pneumococcal vaccines and the polio vaccines — have never been studied.” “Congress passed the 1986 Vaccine Act and said, you’ve got to study the DTP vaccine… That study has never been done.” “The only studies that were done were MMR studies, and they were all epidemiological studies… you can’t prove causation with an epidemiological study.” “In 2017, the Institute of Medicine looked at all of the MMR studies and they threw out all but four of them… and the four that were left were all epidemiological studies.” “None of them did what you would want to do if you actually wanted the answer, which is to compare health outcomes in a vaccinated group against health outcomes in an unvaccinated group.” “That’s what we need to do and those studies we’re doing now.”

End Tribalism in Politics

1,039,371 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

You've seen what happened when I handed the science to someone who disagreed with me. This is what that study actually found. Vaccinated children were two and a half times more likely to have at least one chronic disease. Across every major health category in the study, the unvaccinated children were healthier. Those are his numbers from his study. I am gladly traveling the world to talk about it and the world is now watching "An Inconvenient Study"

You've seen what happened when I handed the science to someone who disagreed with me. This is what that study actually found. Vaccinated children were two and a half times more likely to have at least one chronic disease. Across every major health category in the study, the unvaccinated children were healthier. Those are his numbers from his study. I am gladly traveling the world to talk about it and the world is now watching "An Inconvenient Study"

Del Bigtree

38,099 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Robert Kennedy Jr. wants to do the most basic thing science can do - compare the health outcomes of vaccinated children to unvaccinated children using the largest medical database in America. That's it. That's the study. That's the scientific method. And the American Academy of Pediatrics is suing him to stop it. Think about what that means. Not content with blocking changes to the vaccine schedule, they are now going to court to prevent an investigation into whether the schedule is actually producing healthy children. The one question the entire program should have been answering for fifty years, and the people who run that program are fighting in federal court to make sure it never gets asked. This is an industry protecting itself from its own data. I am not accusing anyone in medicine of malice. I am saying that the long-term health investigation has never been done with the seriousness it deserves, and now that someone is finally trying to do it, there is a worldwide effort to shut it down before it starts. We have to do this study. We have databases right now, like the Henry Ford Health database, that could give us real answers. Every database in this country should be opened to this investigation. The scientific method demands it. The health of our children demands it. The only people who have something to fear from the truth are the ones fighting this hard to hide from it.

Robert Kennedy Jr. wants to do the most basic thing science can do - compare the health outcomes of vaccinated children to unvaccinated children using the largest medical database in America. That's it. That's the study. That's the scientific method. And the American Academy of Pediatrics is suing him to stop it. Think about what that means. Not content with blocking changes to the vaccine schedule, they are now going to court to prevent an investigation into whether the schedule is actually producing healthy children. The one question the entire program should have been answering for fifty years, and the people who run that program are fighting in federal court to make sure it never gets asked. This is an industry protecting itself from its own data. I am not accusing anyone in medicine of malice. I am saying that the long-term health investigation has never been done with the seriousness it deserves, and now that someone is finally trying to do it, there is a worldwide effort to shut it down before it starts. We have to do this study. We have databases right now, like the Henry Ford Health database, that could give us real answers. Every database in this country should be opened to this investigation. The scientific method demands it. The health of our children demands it. The only people who have something to fear from the truth are the ones fighting this hard to hide from it.

Del Bigtree

434,637 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨Del explains what is REALLY happening: "I will say to you this: there are those who could honestly say that what Paul Offit is saying is true. And whether or not vaccines do cause autism, he's trying to protect the United States of America and frankly every nation in the world that's been a part of this fraud because they're all going to be bankrupted if they get sued for what they've done. There's an atonement. There's a gnashing of teeth. This is Armageddon, folks. That's what is at stake. So, when Paul Offit tells you there's been science done, would you ever trust science done by someone who is hanging with the news that, should they discover what they don't want to find, it is going to destroy them and everything and the nation they live in? That is the motive. That is the motive for the greatest crime that's ever happened. It's why Paul Offit has been perfectly happy to say this to every parent of autism and everyone that's ever been lined up: "F you. You don't exist in my world. I don't care about you. I will never do the studies because I have a lie to uphold." WATCH the full show:

🚨Del explains what is REALLY happening: "I will say to you this: there are those who could honestly say that what Paul Offit is saying is true. And whether or not vaccines do cause autism, he's trying to protect the United States of America and frankly every nation in the world that's been a part of this fraud because they're all going to be bankrupted if they get sued for what they've done. There's an atonement. There's a gnashing of teeth. This is Armageddon, folks. That's what is at stake. So, when Paul Offit tells you there's been science done, would you ever trust science done by someone who is hanging with the news that, should they discover what they don't want to find, it is going to destroy them and everything and the nation they live in? That is the motive. That is the motive for the greatest crime that's ever happened. It's why Paul Offit has been perfectly happy to say this to every parent of autism and everyone that's ever been lined up: "F you. You don't exist in my world. I don't care about you. I will never do the studies because I have a lie to uphold." WATCH the full show:

The HighWire

20,503 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

🔥 College Student Challenges RFK Jr to a Debate on Whether Vaccines Cause Autism & Immediately Gets Schooled STUDENT: “Do you still agree with the claims by Children's Health Defense or … are you more educated and not believe that anymore?” RFK JR: “Only one vaccine has ever been studied — the MMR vaccine … None of them did what you would want to do if you actually wanted the answer, which is to compare health outcomes in a vaccinated group against health outcomes in an unvaccinated group. That's what we need to do. And those are studies we're doing now. They have never been done. The people who told you that have been lying to you.”

🔥 College Student Challenges RFK Jr to a Debate on Whether Vaccines Cause Autism & Immediately Gets Schooled STUDENT: “Do you still agree with the claims by Children's Health Defense or … are you more educated and not believe that anymore?” RFK JR: “Only one vaccine has ever been studied — the MMR vaccine … None of them did what you would want to do if you actually wanted the answer, which is to compare health outcomes in a vaccinated group against health outcomes in an unvaccinated group. That's what we need to do. And those are studies we're doing now. They have never been done. The people who told you that have been lying to you.”

Chief Nerd

544,442 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

This one is from September 2, 2023. It is another case study on Fauci's method of prevarication. After devastating study citations from the interviewer showing that masks don't work, Fauci responded: "but masks work on an individual level". This is nonsense. Here's why. To do science on masks, you have a masked group and an unmasked group. You compare the rate of infection in each group. This is called a randomized trial. This is how science is done. If the rate of infection is the same, then masks don't work. This was what the studies on masks showed. No difference. Now, there is simply no such thing as scientific studies showing that "masks work at the individual level". Fauci either didn't understand how science works or he was lying and making things up. It really is that simple. Fauci said gobbledygook in order to keep the idea of masks alive. He did it throughout the pandemic, but especially with masks. It's incredibly shameful for Fauci to abuse science in this way. But it's par for the course in the way he communicated science throughout the entire pandemic. Sad.

This one is from September 2, 2023. It is another case study on Fauci's method of prevarication. After devastating study citations from the interviewer showing that masks don't work, Fauci responded: "but masks work on an individual level". This is nonsense. Here's why. To do science on masks, you have a masked group and an unmasked group. You compare the rate of infection in each group. This is called a randomized trial. This is how science is done. If the rate of infection is the same, then masks don't work. This was what the studies on masks showed. No difference. Now, there is simply no such thing as scientific studies showing that "masks work at the individual level". Fauci either didn't understand how science works or he was lying and making things up. It really is that simple. Fauci said gobbledygook in order to keep the idea of masks alive. He did it throughout the pandemic, but especially with masks. It's incredibly shameful for Fauci to abuse science in this way. But it's par for the course in the way he communicated science throughout the entire pandemic. Sad.

Kevin Bass

56,102 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

.Naval: Epistemology, which is a fancy word for the theory of how knowledge grows or how knowledge growth occurs. And we've all been told since we're young that there's a scientific method and that scientists sort of do this stuff in white lab coats and we're supposed to accept it because of this thing called the scientific method. And then they give us true beliefs that we can then say, well the science is settled and we take that we move on. And we all only have a very, very vague understanding of how this works. And people say, well maybe you go out in the real world, you look at what's happening, you make all these observations, and then based on that you form a theory, you test the theory against more observations, and the more observations you get the closer you get to the truth. And once you have enough observation it's true and then you call it a scientific theory or a law and it's settled and you move on. And this is the popular conception of how science works. And as Popper pointed out and as you take even further, this is completely wrong. And so I'd love for you to get into that, which is what is knowledge? How does it grow? What is the real scientific method? And how do we figure things out? David Deutsch: I love the way you just stated the prevailing view there and laced every aspect of it with the contempt that it deserves. So you just went through touching every base. It's amazing that this series of misconceptions is still common sense. I mean, that it was common sense at a time when we didn't really have science or when science was just starting up, when the main issue in science was freeing itself from dogmatism, freeing itself from religion, freeing itself from authority, and so on. There it was understandable that people would look for an alternative source of authority and they would think, oh, it's sense impressions. We can see the world and you know, these religious people, they can't even see God and so on. And so we are confined to what we can see. That's where we get our ideas from. And as you say, that is completely false. Sense impressions, like all observation, even the most careful scientific observation is all theory laden. And theories are inherently fallible. I mean, we actually want to replace our best theories. Everybody who does a PhD is technically anyway, working to overturn something in the existing body of knowledge. You're not turned away at the door if you say, I don't believe this stuff, I'm going to produce something better. Whereas for most of human history, that was exactly what you were forbidden to do. The idea was that we already had all the important knowledge. If you want to discover something new, what you had to make sure of was that it didn't contradict the existing knowledge. Now, you have to make sure that it does contradict existing knowledge. So more or less. Naval: Yeah, it's this tradition of criticism that you've talked about in the West, that the Enlightenment really ushered in the Enlightenment era. David Deutsch: It has been institutionalized. So in many ways, our institutions are wiser than we are. So the institutions of science, for instance, have this built in, even if scientists actually don't always act that way. In fact, they often don't act that way, and act in a dogmatic way and try to preserve the status quo and are resistant to new ideas and so on. But the institutions, the way the procedures of science work, makes the right thing happen in the end anyway, regardless of what the people are trying to do. Naval: So you're saying the knowledge of the true scientific method is embedded in the institutions of science in the PhD process? David Deutsch: Well, the best scientific method that we know of, and one shouldn't really think of it as a method, you know, there's this wonderful lecture by Popper when he first was made a professor at the London School of Economics. He was made a professor of scientific method, and his first six lectures, I wish the rest of them were, the first six lectures are on the internet somewhere. And he starts the first one by saying, I am the first professor of scientific method in the British Empire. The British Empire still existed at the time, more or less. And so the first thing I want to say to you is that there is no such thing as the scientific method. And then he goes on from there. So this subject does not exist. So if any of you have come here to learn the handle that you have to turn in order to make scientific knowledge come out the other end, you're going to be disappointed.

.Naval: Epistemology, which is a fancy word for the theory of how knowledge grows or how knowledge growth occurs. And we've all been told since we're young that there's a scientific method and that scientists sort of do this stuff in white lab coats and we're supposed to accept it because of this thing called the scientific method. And then they give us true beliefs that we can then say, well the science is settled and we take that we move on. And we all only have a very, very vague understanding of how this works. And people say, well maybe you go out in the real world, you look at what's happening, you make all these observations, and then based on that you form a theory, you test the theory against more observations, and the more observations you get the closer you get to the truth. And once you have enough observation it's true and then you call it a scientific theory or a law and it's settled and you move on. And this is the popular conception of how science works. And as Popper pointed out and as you take even further, this is completely wrong. And so I'd love for you to get into that, which is what is knowledge? How does it grow? What is the real scientific method? And how do we figure things out? David Deutsch: I love the way you just stated the prevailing view there and laced every aspect of it with the contempt that it deserves. So you just went through touching every base. It's amazing that this series of misconceptions is still common sense. I mean, that it was common sense at a time when we didn't really have science or when science was just starting up, when the main issue in science was freeing itself from dogmatism, freeing itself from religion, freeing itself from authority, and so on. There it was understandable that people would look for an alternative source of authority and they would think, oh, it's sense impressions. We can see the world and you know, these religious people, they can't even see God and so on. And so we are confined to what we can see. That's where we get our ideas from. And as you say, that is completely false. Sense impressions, like all observation, even the most careful scientific observation is all theory laden. And theories are inherently fallible. I mean, we actually want to replace our best theories. Everybody who does a PhD is technically anyway, working to overturn something in the existing body of knowledge. You're not turned away at the door if you say, I don't believe this stuff, I'm going to produce something better. Whereas for most of human history, that was exactly what you were forbidden to do. The idea was that we already had all the important knowledge. If you want to discover something new, what you had to make sure of was that it didn't contradict the existing knowledge. Now, you have to make sure that it does contradict existing knowledge. So more or less. Naval: Yeah, it's this tradition of criticism that you've talked about in the West, that the Enlightenment really ushered in the Enlightenment era. David Deutsch: It has been institutionalized. So in many ways, our institutions are wiser than we are. So the institutions of science, for instance, have this built in, even if scientists actually don't always act that way. In fact, they often don't act that way, and act in a dogmatic way and try to preserve the status quo and are resistant to new ideas and so on. But the institutions, the way the procedures of science work, makes the right thing happen in the end anyway, regardless of what the people are trying to do. Naval: So you're saying the knowledge of the true scientific method is embedded in the institutions of science in the PhD process? David Deutsch: Well, the best scientific method that we know of, and one shouldn't really think of it as a method, you know, there's this wonderful lecture by Popper when he first was made a professor at the London School of Economics. He was made a professor of scientific method, and his first six lectures, I wish the rest of them were, the first six lectures are on the internet somewhere. And he starts the first one by saying, I am the first professor of scientific method in the British Empire. The British Empire still existed at the time, more or less. And so the first thing I want to say to you is that there is no such thing as the scientific method. And then he goes on from there. So this subject does not exist. So if any of you have come here to learn the handle that you have to turn in order to make scientific knowledge come out the other end, you're going to be disappointed.

Deutsch Explains

116,352 просмотров • 1 год назад

The head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Health ran what may be the largest vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study ever done. When I asked him, "Is there a better way to do this study?" He said, "I can't think of any way you could do it better." "Is this study important?" "It's very important." "Will you publish it?" "I'm not going to publish it because it'll destroy my career." "If the climate was different, would you publish this as it is?" "I would publish it exactly as it is." That's the man who ran the study, in his own words, on hidden camera. That's why I made the film. Watch An Inconvenient Study. 👇 Mary Talley Bowden MD

The head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Health ran what may be the largest vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study ever done. When I asked him, "Is there a better way to do this study?" He said, "I can't think of any way you could do it better." "Is this study important?" "It's very important." "Will you publish it?" "I'm not going to publish it because it'll destroy my career." "If the climate was different, would you publish this as it is?" "I would publish it exactly as it is." That's the man who ran the study, in his own words, on hidden camera. That's why I made the film. Watch An Inconvenient Study. 👇 Mary Talley Bowden MD

Del Bigtree

122,777 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

"There is no evidence vaccines cause autism." You've heard it a thousand times. Said with total confidence. Said like it ends the conversation. There is no evidence period. I didn't take their word for it. I sued the CDC. I had a simple request: Show me the trials you rely on to prove that the first six vaccines given in the first six months of life don't cause autism. They sent back 20 studies. Not one of them included the Hepatitis B vaccine. Not the DTaP. Not the polio vaccine. None of the six we actually asked about. The CDC has no science showing that the vaccines we inject into newborns and infants don't cause autism. None. They don't have it because they never did the studies. What they DO have is a collection of manipulated research centered almost entirely on one vaccine, MMR. That's it. That's the foundation. One of those studies is the centerpiece of my documentary Vaxxed, and when you see what they did to that data, you will never look at this the same way again. This entire edifice is built on assumptions, wishful thinking, and relentless propaganda. And while they've been defending that propaganda, the injuries have kept coming. The science was never there. We just weren't supposed to notice.

"There is no evidence vaccines cause autism." You've heard it a thousand times. Said with total confidence. Said like it ends the conversation. There is no evidence period. I didn't take their word for it. I sued the CDC. I had a simple request: Show me the trials you rely on to prove that the first six vaccines given in the first six months of life don't cause autism. They sent back 20 studies. Not one of them included the Hepatitis B vaccine. Not the DTaP. Not the polio vaccine. None of the six we actually asked about. The CDC has no science showing that the vaccines we inject into newborns and infants don't cause autism. None. They don't have it because they never did the studies. What they DO have is a collection of manipulated research centered almost entirely on one vaccine, MMR. That's it. That's the foundation. One of those studies is the centerpiece of my documentary Vaxxed, and when you see what they did to that data, you will never look at this the same way again. This entire edifice is built on assumptions, wishful thinking, and relentless propaganda. And while they've been defending that propaganda, the injuries have kept coming. The science was never there. We just weren't supposed to notice.

Del Bigtree

107,259 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

The Most Important Vaccine Safety Study Ever Suppressed. Henry Ford Vaxxed vs. Unvaxxed Study: Vaccinated Kids Had 453% More Neurodevelopmental Disorders. Unvaccinated children had ZERO cases of brain dysfunction, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities or tics. Soon To Be Released..."Impact of Childhood Vaccination on Short- and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study" ICAN lead counsel Aaron Siri, Esq. revealed the results of an unpublished study from Michigan’s Henry Ford Health System. The study was done by infectious disease physician, Dr Marcus Zervos, MD. In 2016, journalist Del Bigtree issued a challenge to the head of infectious disease at one of the most prestigious medical institutions in the world: conduct the most thorough vaxxed vs. unvaxxed study that has ever been done. The expert, Dr Marcus Zervos MD, took up the challenge and ran the study to prove Del wrong. What the study revealed was so horrifying that it was locked away, hidden from the public...until now. Henry Ford birth cohort (n=18,468) tracked children from birth for 10 years. The Study Found... -4.29 times the rate of asthma -3.03 times the rate of atopic disease -5.96 times the rate of autoimmune disease -5.53 times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders which included 4.47 times the rate of speech disorder and 3.28 times the rate of developmental delay. Notably, the study also found the following: -Brain Dysfunction: 8 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Diabetes: 42 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -ADHD: 262 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Behavioral Disability: 165 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Learning Disability: 65 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Intellectual Disability: 5 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Tics: 46 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Other Psychological Disability 9 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated 👇An Inconvenient Study: Premieres October 3👇 👇Figure #1 From The Unpublished Study👇 👇Vaccinated Study By Hooker & Miller👇 Credits: ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network Del Bigtree Aaron Siri Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH® McCullough Foundation Senator Ron Johnson The HighWire Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

The Most Important Vaccine Safety Study Ever Suppressed. Henry Ford Vaxxed vs. Unvaxxed Study: Vaccinated Kids Had 453% More Neurodevelopmental Disorders. Unvaccinated children had ZERO cases of brain dysfunction, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities or tics. Soon To Be Released..."Impact of Childhood Vaccination on Short- and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study" ICAN lead counsel Aaron Siri, Esq. revealed the results of an unpublished study from Michigan’s Henry Ford Health System. The study was done by infectious disease physician, Dr Marcus Zervos, MD. In 2016, journalist Del Bigtree issued a challenge to the head of infectious disease at one of the most prestigious medical institutions in the world: conduct the most thorough vaxxed vs. unvaxxed study that has ever been done. The expert, Dr Marcus Zervos MD, took up the challenge and ran the study to prove Del wrong. What the study revealed was so horrifying that it was locked away, hidden from the public...until now. Henry Ford birth cohort (n=18,468) tracked children from birth for 10 years. The Study Found... -4.29 times the rate of asthma -3.03 times the rate of atopic disease -5.96 times the rate of autoimmune disease -5.53 times the rate of neurodevelopmental disorders which included 4.47 times the rate of speech disorder and 3.28 times the rate of developmental delay. Notably, the study also found the following: -Brain Dysfunction: 8 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Diabetes: 42 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -ADHD: 262 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Behavioral Disability: 165 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Learning Disability: 65 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Intellectual Disability: 5 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Tics: 46 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated -Other Psychological Disability 9 in the vaccinated group and 0 in the unvaccinated 👇An Inconvenient Study: Premieres October 3👇 👇Figure #1 From The Unpublished Study👇 👇Vaccinated Study By Hooker & Miller👇 Credits: ICAN - Informed Consent Action Network Del Bigtree Aaron Siri Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH® McCullough Foundation Senator Ron Johnson The HighWire Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Valerie Anne Smith

87,981 просмотров • 1 год назад

Had another interview with a reporter the other day and they asked me about the studies the government has done on the shots collectively given to infants in the first year of life, and whether they used a proper control group of children who didn't receive those shots. These studies are such a joke. What they end up doing with MMR, for instance, is saying they took children who got all the vaccines except MMR, then all the vaccines plus MMR, and didn't see a statistically significant uptick in autism, and therefore MMR doesn't cause autism. And that study is fine, if all the other vaccines have already been proven not to cause autism. Then you have a proper control group. But the Institute of Medicine states clearly there is no study that isolates the DTaP vaccine. And the CDC has suspected DTaP since the 1986 Act, which literally listed diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis as being associated with autism and as the first thing that should be investigated once they took on the liability. That investigation has never happened. I think we should ask ourselves why. Because if DTaP causes autism, it erases the validity of the MMR study entirely. Your control group had a product in it that can cause autism. That is the problem with the science that has been done so far. I have had both Dr. Stanley Plotkin and Kathryn Edwards on the stand in front of Aaron Siri, two of the most iconic figures in the vaccine space. When asked, listing every vaccine one by one, "Do you have a study showing it doesn't cause autism?" Kathryn Edwards had none. Stanley Plotkin stated the same thing under oath. What they both explained is that they made an assumption that vaccines don't cause autism. I have that on video on my website. These are the authors of Plotkin's Vaccines, considered the bible on vaccinations. So if your top vaccine scientists cannot provide a single study under oath, why are newspapers reporting there are mountains of evidence? I sued the CDC. I said show me the trials you relied upon for the first six vaccines in the first six months of life to conclude they don't cause autism. They had zero. Not for Hepatitis B. Not for polio. Not for DTaP. Zero. There is no two or three year placebo trial for these products like you would see with every other drug. And that is not an accident. Causation is established in a placebo trial. If you skip that trial, you remove your ability to ever get to causation. You are permanently stuck in the land of "associated with." And the agency that is required to do the safety studies is the same agency defending itself in court against me. They are not doing the science, so you cannot win. That is where we are.

Had another interview with a reporter the other day and they asked me about the studies the government has done on the shots collectively given to infants in the first year of life, and whether they used a proper control group of children who didn't receive those shots. These studies are such a joke. What they end up doing with MMR, for instance, is saying they took children who got all the vaccines except MMR, then all the vaccines plus MMR, and didn't see a statistically significant uptick in autism, and therefore MMR doesn't cause autism. And that study is fine, if all the other vaccines have already been proven not to cause autism. Then you have a proper control group. But the Institute of Medicine states clearly there is no study that isolates the DTaP vaccine. And the CDC has suspected DTaP since the 1986 Act, which literally listed diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis as being associated with autism and as the first thing that should be investigated once they took on the liability. That investigation has never happened. I think we should ask ourselves why. Because if DTaP causes autism, it erases the validity of the MMR study entirely. Your control group had a product in it that can cause autism. That is the problem with the science that has been done so far. I have had both Dr. Stanley Plotkin and Kathryn Edwards on the stand in front of Aaron Siri, two of the most iconic figures in the vaccine space. When asked, listing every vaccine one by one, "Do you have a study showing it doesn't cause autism?" Kathryn Edwards had none. Stanley Plotkin stated the same thing under oath. What they both explained is that they made an assumption that vaccines don't cause autism. I have that on video on my website. These are the authors of Plotkin's Vaccines, considered the bible on vaccinations. So if your top vaccine scientists cannot provide a single study under oath, why are newspapers reporting there are mountains of evidence? I sued the CDC. I said show me the trials you relied upon for the first six vaccines in the first six months of life to conclude they don't cause autism. They had zero. Not for Hepatitis B. Not for polio. Not for DTaP. Zero. There is no two or three year placebo trial for these products like you would see with every other drug. And that is not an accident. Causation is established in a placebo trial. If you skip that trial, you remove your ability to ever get to causation. You are permanently stuck in the land of "associated with." And the agency that is required to do the safety studies is the same agency defending itself in court against me. They are not doing the science, so you cannot win. That is where we are.

Del Bigtree

30,011 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Today on CNN, after devastating study citations from the interviewer showing that masks don't work, Fauci responded: "but masks work on an individual level". But this is nonsense. Here's why. To do science on masks, you have a masked group and an unmasked group. You compare the rate of infection in each group. This is called a randomized trial. This is how science is done. If the rate of infection is the same, then masks don't work. This was what the studies on masks showed. No difference. Now, there is simply no such thing as scientific studies showing that "masks work at the individual level". Fauci either doesn't understand how science works or he is lying and making things up. It really is that simple. Fauci is saying gobbledygook in order to keep the idea of masks alive. It's incredibly shameful for Fauci to abuse science in this way. But it's par for the course in the way he has communicated science throughout the entire pandemic. Sad.

Today on CNN, after devastating study citations from the interviewer showing that masks don't work, Fauci responded: "but masks work on an individual level". But this is nonsense. Here's why. To do science on masks, you have a masked group and an unmasked group. You compare the rate of infection in each group. This is called a randomized trial. This is how science is done. If the rate of infection is the same, then masks don't work. This was what the studies on masks showed. No difference. Now, there is simply no such thing as scientific studies showing that "masks work at the individual level". Fauci either doesn't understand how science works or he is lying and making things up. It really is that simple. Fauci is saying gobbledygook in order to keep the idea of masks alive. It's incredibly shameful for Fauci to abuse science in this way. But it's par for the course in the way he has communicated science throughout the entire pandemic. Sad.

Kevin Bass

2,316,533 просмотров • 3 лет назад

In An Inconvenient Study I went to someone who thought I was wrong. Someone who believed vaccines were safe and had the data to back it up. I told him to use it. Design the study yourself, run it your way, and whatever you find I will accept. That is how science is supposed to work. We are hoping Robert Kennedy Jr. can run a larger version of that study using the American database. This fight is not only about children. COVID was the attempt to bring adults into the same system, to begin normalizing a lifetime schedule of 72 vaccines for every person. They were always coming for you.

In An Inconvenient Study I went to someone who thought I was wrong. Someone who believed vaccines were safe and had the data to back it up. I told him to use it. Design the study yourself, run it your way, and whatever you find I will accept. That is how science is supposed to work. We are hoping Robert Kennedy Jr. can run a larger version of that study using the American database. This fight is not only about children. COVID was the attempt to bring adults into the same system, to begin normalizing a lifetime schedule of 72 vaccines for every person. They were always coming for you.

Del Bigtree

22,539 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

RFK Jr Goes Off on CNN Reporter Reporter: "It's factually true that the covid vaccine worked. The covid vaccine prevented deaths. There is data upon data upon data." RFK Jr: "Can you show me one study?" Reporter: "I can tell you that when it comes to the vaccine, there have been studies that show that because of vaccine disinformation, there could have been 100,000 to 200,000 lives in the US saved, but because people didn't get the vaccine..." RFK Jr: "You are saying something that you cannot show me a single study." Reporter: "I am not saying nonsense. You're talking about studies that don't exist." RFK Jr: "Do you see your job as ending vaccine hesitancy, or do you see your job is telling the truth?" Reporter: "I see my job is telling the truth, and the truth is that there is study after study after study. It's one of the most studied things out there in science." RFK Jr: "You repeat it like a parrot. I've actually read the science." Reporter: "I'm not debating this..." RFK Jr: "Of course you're not because all you know how to do is repeat things that people told you and say trust the experts. That's what you did during covid." RFK Jr: "Now we know that Anthony Fauci, who was the expert, was lying about everything, about masks, about the social distancing, about natural immunity, about the transmission from the vaccine, about the source of covid. He was lying, and you were punishing people for not trusting the experts, and now you're rolling out the experts again to talk about something that you have no personal knowledge of." Reporter: "Okay, well guess what? That is my job to talk to people."

RFK Jr Goes Off on CNN Reporter Reporter: "It's factually true that the covid vaccine worked. The covid vaccine prevented deaths. There is data upon data upon data." RFK Jr: "Can you show me one study?" Reporter: "I can tell you that when it comes to the vaccine, there have been studies that show that because of vaccine disinformation, there could have been 100,000 to 200,000 lives in the US saved, but because people didn't get the vaccine..." RFK Jr: "You are saying something that you cannot show me a single study." Reporter: "I am not saying nonsense. You're talking about studies that don't exist." RFK Jr: "Do you see your job as ending vaccine hesitancy, or do you see your job is telling the truth?" Reporter: "I see my job is telling the truth, and the truth is that there is study after study after study. It's one of the most studied things out there in science." RFK Jr: "You repeat it like a parrot. I've actually read the science." Reporter: "I'm not debating this..." RFK Jr: "Of course you're not because all you know how to do is repeat things that people told you and say trust the experts. That's what you did during covid." RFK Jr: "Now we know that Anthony Fauci, who was the expert, was lying about everything, about masks, about the social distancing, about natural immunity, about the transmission from the vaccine, about the source of covid. He was lying, and you were punishing people for not trusting the experts, and now you're rolling out the experts again to talk about something that you have no personal knowledge of." Reporter: "Okay, well guess what? That is my job to talk to people."

PBD Podcast

48,376 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

What a moment…. standing on stage at the Malibu Film Festival for the world premiere of An Inconvenient Study, where our film won Best of Festival. When I met Dr. Marcus Zervos from Henry Ford Health, I asked if he’d ever compare vaccinated to unvaccinated, he told me that he was a scientist and follows the science where it leads him. That study got done. But it never got submitted for publication. Now, the story is told in the film for everyone to decide what that means, and how far we’re willing to follow the science ourselves. 🎥 You can stream or download the film, and read the study for yourself at Share this widely. We need your help. This could change everything.

What a moment…. standing on stage at the Malibu Film Festival for the world premiere of An Inconvenient Study, where our film won Best of Festival. When I met Dr. Marcus Zervos from Henry Ford Health, I asked if he’d ever compare vaccinated to unvaccinated, he told me that he was a scientist and follows the science where it leads him. That study got done. But it never got submitted for publication. Now, the story is told in the film for everyone to decide what that means, and how far we’re willing to follow the science ourselves. 🎥 You can stream or download the film, and read the study for yourself at Share this widely. We need your help. This could change everything.

Del Bigtree

119,955 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад